Hindawi Publishing Corporation

Education Research International

Volume 2014, Article ID 431542, 7 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/431542

Research Article
Implementation of Cooperative Learning in Science:
A Developmental-cum-Experimental Study

Sonam Mehta and A. K. Kulshrestha

Faculty of Education, Dayalbagh Educational Institute Deemed University, Agra 282005, India

Correspondence should be addressed to Sonam Mehta; [email protected]

Received 30 January 2014; Revised 19 May 2014; Accepted 7 June 2014; Published 17 July 2014

Academic Editor: Eric Z. F. Liu

Copyright © 2014 S. Mehta and A. K. Kulshrestha. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons
Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is
properly cited.

This research paper is designed to set forth ideas on how to implement cooperative learning and examine its effect on social
and cooperative skills while imparting science education at the Secondary Level. The strategy used is Jigsaw Technique making
heterogeneous groups based on intelligence and gender. Instructional material and observation schedule were constructed by
researchers. The cooperative skills of the students were found improving during the experimental period, and they developed
positive interdependence, face-to-face interaction skills, and feeling of individual accountability, as compared by Mann Whitney
U test. The students developed the feeling of working in a group in the classroom of science, and it also improved performance, as
the discussion always leads to a considerable degree of clarity of concepts.

1. Introduction the new approaches to teaching that have been adopted.”

The worldwide institutes of repute have conducted surveys,
In the modern era of science and technology, especially, workshops, seminars, and research activities on pedagogy,
in the realm of information technology, the approach to teaching aids, infrastructure, and newly established theories
education has undergone significant changes. The philosophy in education (The Centre for Pedagogical Innovation (CPI),
of education has played a varied but pivotal role in shaping Brock University, Center for Teaching Excellence, Saint
and designing curriculum. Pedagogy in this respect has also Anselm College). These theories, which give rise to methods
undergone major changes in accordance with the need of and techniques of teaching, emphasize on the all-round
times. The teaching-learning process has become an issue of development of students.
rational consideration and of critical query on various fronts, The students should have cooperative tasks in order to
and there have been academic debates on the instructional make student-student interaction effective for inventions are,
material being provided to the students of various levels actually, the result of the collaborative and cooperative work
worldwide. The American Psychological Association in its and not of an individual effort. As far as need for group work
report 2061 [1] validates the importance of innovative teach- is concerned, science is slightly ahead compared to social
ing methods in science by saying, “Calls for reforms in the sciences. A collaborative venture in the community of sci-
ways we teach science at all levels, and in all disciplines are ence, certainly, brings forth new dimensions to enrich and
wide spread. The effectiveness of the changes being called for, accomplish the classroom teaching of science.
employment of student-centered, active learning pedagogy, The science today should enable the students to meet the
is now well supported by evidence. The relevant data have demands and face the challenges ahead in work environment
come from a number of different disciplines that include the of daily life. Not only knowledge but also communication
learning sciences, cognitive psychology, and educational psy- skills, leadership quality, critical thinking, and listening skills
chology. There is a growing body of research within specific are required to achieve excellence in work. Describing the
scientific teaching communities that supports and validates importance of new teaching methods in science involving
2 Education Research International

group task in contrast to the old textbook recitation method, actively involved in sharing ideas and working cooperatively
Association for Advancement of Science report [1, page 148] to complete academic tasks. Cooperative learning has also
taking a “future” perspective states “The collaborative nature been implemented in lectures, but results are contradictory
of scientific and technological work should be strongly rein- [5]. While Vreven and McFadden [6] found that students did
forced by frequent group activity in the classroom. Scientists not benefit from cooperative learning activities in lectures,
and engineers work mostly in groups and less often as isolated students in a study by Cavanagh [7] greatly valued opportuni-
investigators. Similarly, students should gain experiences ties for engaging in lectures by means of cooperative learning
sharing responsibility for learning with each other. In the activities. Through interaction students learn to interrogate
process of coming to understandings, students in a group issues, share ideas, clarify differences, and construct new
must frequently inform each other about procedures and understandings [8, 9]. Furthermore, Toumasis [10] studied
meanings, argue over findings, and assess how the task is the effect cooperative learning had on 8th–10th graders’
progressing. In the context of team responsibility, feedback ability to read and understand mathematical textbooks. He
and communication become more realistic and are of a char- determined that working cooperatively helped students “. . .
acter very different from the usual individualistic textbook- form new friendships and learn to appreciate differences in
homework-recitation approach (page 202).” ability, differences in personal characteristics and differences
The education today should enable students to withstand in opinion” (page 669). To seek the answer in a contradictory
against all oddities and challenges being faced by them situation validating the importance of cooperative learning
at work place of routine encounters. The teaching method in Indian perspective, this research paper sets forth ideas
should not only serve the academic purpose but also develop on how to implement cooperative learning and examine its
social and cooperative skills recommended by educational effect on social and cooperative skills while imparting science
agencies from time to time. To serve the purpose, among education at the Secondary Level.
all the teaching methods being followed in the world, the Cooperative learning makes the use of varied techniques
cooperative learning has its own philosophic and psychoso- which are learning together and alone, constructive contro-
cial significance today. In the perspective of interaction, versy group investigation, jigsaw procedure, student teams
knowledge sharing, analysis, interpretation, and giving vent achievement divisions (STAD), complex instruction, team
to subjective expression in group, cooperative learning is accelerated instruction (TAI), cooperative learning struc-
considered to be of great utility and wisdom. Following tures, and cooperative integrated reading and composition.
the introduction, the paper introduces cooperative learning Any of the techniques could have been used, but in the
and jigsaw strategy giving the contradictory findings and present study the technique used is Jigsaw Technique.
justification of using Jigsaw Technique. The next section The justification of using Jigsaw Technique is the need
deals with the design, sample, and experimental setup of the of research in science; the adequate understanding of any
research followed by hypothesis, method, and development of phenomenon requires proper research by the students. Jigsaw
instructional material and observation schedule. Further, the strategy is the simulated setting of the scientists of scientific
paper describes the period of implementation in classroom community. As the scientists do their research and discuss the
and the result it produces, leading to discussion followed results with their colleagues, which leads to new discoveries
by conclusion. The paper ends with implication in the and inventions, in the same way the students do their assigned
classroom, limitations, and suggestion for further research. piece of work and discuss their knowledge with the group. In
this study, groups with five students are set up. Concerning
2. Cooperative Learning and Jigsaw Technique member selection, cooperative learning proponents suggest
it is better that instructors assign students to groups [11, 12],
Cooperative learning is defined as a division for labour because random grouping or self-selection by students is
undertaken to solve a problem. For any given task, students likely to exclude or negatively affect minority students [13,
divide the work and come together to present findings. Each 14]. Each group is heterogeneous based on intelligence and
student makes an individual contribution [2]. It is a teaching gender, and the groups among themselves are homogenous.
strategy in which small teams, each with students of different The effectiveness of the cooperative learning is checked by
levels of ability, use a variety of learning activities to improve measuring social and cooperative skills of the students as a
their understanding of a subject. Cooperative learning is group. The principal goals of the study are as follows:
different from collaborative learning. The basic difference is
that collaboration is a philosophy of interaction and personal (1) to develop and implement instructional material
lifestyle where individuals are responsible for their actions, for applying cooperative learning approach in ninth
including learning, and respect the ability and contribution of grade;
their peers, whereas cooperation is a structure of interaction (2) to study the effect of cooperative learning technique
designed to facilitate the accomplishment of a specific end on the social and cooperative skills of students.
product or goal through people working together in groups
[3]. Each member of a team is responsible not only for learn- 3. Experimental Materials and Methods
ing what is taught but also for helping teammates learn, thus
creating an atmosphere of collective achievement. Zakaria 3.1. Design and Sample. The research design used in the study
and Iksan [4] believed that cooperative learning is grounded is “one group, pretest and posttest” in which we observed the
in the belief that learning is most effective when students are cooperative skills of the students before the implementation
Education Research International 3

of the treatment we are providing them with (teaching by 4. Development of Instructional

cooperative learning method), during the treatment, and Material and Observation Schedule
then after the treatment. As sampling was purposive, the
difference between the cooperative skills of the groups was The development of the instruction material in accordance
calculated by Mann Whitney U test. The experimental period with the cooperative learning approach of teaching involves
was 10 days. the critical analysis of the five elements of the coopera-
To know the effect of cooperative learning technique on tive learning, that is, positive interdependence, individual
the social and cooperative skills of students, a sample of the accountability, face-to-face interaction, small group process-
ninth class central board of secondary education (CBSE) was ing, and social skills. Positive interdependence means that
selected by purposive sampling. 40 students were selected group members should perceive that the collective effort of
which include both boys and girls in ratio 1 : 1 and students the group is essential for the individual learners to achieve
with average and high intelligence. The average age of the their goals [16]. Individual accountability means that, in order
students was 14.5 years and the groups were heterogeneous to prevent social loafing, the students should be assessed by
in terms of intelligence and gender. 40 students had 8 home their individual learning outcomes. Each group member is
groups and at times 5 expert groups. To evaluate the effect held accountable for his or her work. Individual account-
on social and cooperative skills, the observation schedule ability helps to avoid members from “hitchhiking” on other
developed by the researcher was employed. The teacher group members’ accomplishments. Thus, while working
observed the group and acted as a facilitator to resolve the within a group, the student might still pursue individual goals
conflict in class within or among the groups. and be assessed as an individual. Awarding individual grades
to students does not conflict with cooperative learning as
3.2. Hypotheses. The hypotheses made for the study are as it enhances individual accountability [5]. Promoting success
follows. of group members by praising, encouraging, supporting, or
assisting each other is possible in face-to-face interaction in
(1) There is no significant difference in the social and the best possible way. Cooperative learning groups set the
cooperative skills of the students before and during stage for students to learn social skills. These skills help to
the implementation of cooperative learning based build stronger cooperation among group members. Leader-
instructional material. ship, decision making, trust-building, and communication
(2) There is no significant difference in the social and are different skills that are supposed to develop in cooperative
cooperative skills of the students before and after learning setting. And the assessment of how groups are
the implementation of cooperative learning based functioning to achieve their goals is determined by how
instructional material. effective group processing is. By reviewing group behaviour,
the students and teacher get a chance to discuss needs or
3.3. Method. Fulfillment of the above objectives and testing problems with the group. Groups do get a chance to express
the hypotheses require the use of developmental method feelings about beneficial and unhelpful aspects to correct
involving experimental setup in the classroom and quantita- unwanted behavior and celebrate success.
tive statistics. The design of the instructional material is in Other key elements that are critical to the effective imple-
accordance with the format used [15]. The development of mentation of CL include promoting each other’s learning,
instructional material was validated by the pilot study and accepting responsibility for contributing to the group’s efforts
opinion of 12 experts. The developed instructional material or task, demonstrating the interpersonal and small group
was used to teach the subjects for ten sessions in an experi- skills needed to resolve conflicts, and monitoring and review-
mental group. The development of instructional material was ing group’s progress [17]. Moreover, students in structured
followed by checking its effect on the cooperative and social groups are more task focused, provide more detailed expla-
skills of the students. Since the researcher could not find nations to each other to assist each other’s understanding,
an evaluation tool which would serve the purpose, a self- use language that is more cognitively challenging, and attain
constructed tool was employed on the students, that is, an higher learning outcomes [18–20].
observation schedule for evaluation of cooperative skills of Keeping in view all of these elements, the instructional
students. The study is done in three steps: planning, imple- material, that is, the lesson plans, was prepared adapting the
menting, and observing the skills. Planning phase includes lesson plan format given by [15]. The prepared instructional
the development and try-out of instructional material in pilot material was sent to 12 experts in the field of education,
study. The science in ninth standard class has three parts: that is, six experts of teaching science, four school teachers
physics, chemistry, and biology. The researcher selected the of science, and two language experts, and they found it to
field of biology as it is an area of more of students’ practical be apt with regard to the knowledge and cognitive level of
life situation and the problems faced by them almost every students of class ninth. Afterwards the material was applied
day. With the consideration of the application of cooperative on a small group (pilot study of the instructional material)
approach in the field of science, the topics selected include and two modifications were done after the pilot study.
health and factors affecting it, disease and its various causes, Based on the five elements of cooperative learning and
how to become disease free, viral and bacterial infections, their relation with the different aspects of the personality of
organ specific and tissue specific infections, and classification students, the skills are decided to be included in the form of
of the diversified living beings. sixteen items of the tool. The elements are identified in the
4 Education Research International

Table 1: Observation schedule (reliability: 0.85).

Number of items included
S. No. Elements of cooperative learning
First draft (16 items) Final draft (14 items)
1 Positive independence 4 3
2 Individual accountability 4 3
3 Group processing 4 4
4 Face-to-face interaction Setup of the class Setup of the class
5 Social skills 4 4

form of skills included. The skills included are affected by the Table 2: Descriptive statistics of the group in the observation
cooperative learning method of teaching directly or indirectly schedule.
validated by the opinion of the experts (face validity). The Days Mean SD
items are based on listening skills, power of expression of 1 2.89 2.93
ideas, helping the members of the groups, initiative quality, 4 3.32 3.31
relevance of ideas, and participation in the group.
7 3.65 3.66
As per the suggestions extended by the experts, two
10 4.79 4.71
items were removed and two were modified linguistically
and the final draft of the observation schedule with fourteen
items was prepared and all of them were positive items. The
schedule is a group evaluation form. They were checked on a Whitney U test was employed to see the significant difference
five-point scale which included the assessment of every item between the two if it exists. The same procedure was done
in either of the following options: never, rarely, sometimes, between day 1 and day 7 and in case of day 1 and day 10.
usually, and always. The test retest reliability of the tool was This gave the cooperative skills of the students during the
found to be 0.85 (Table 1). The face validity and content entire experimental phase. The mean and standard deviation
validity were analysed by the content experts, and they found of the observation of four days were given in Table 2. The
this tool to be valid. We assigned numerals to the responses, observation schedule was employed on the very first day to
because all the items were positive, so 1 was assigned to know where the students actually stood, and then the skills
never and 2, 3, 4, and 5 were assigned to rarely, sometimes, were observed on the 4th, 7th, and 10th days. This depicted
usually, and always, respectively. The coding of the items can the effect of cooperative learning method on the skills of the
be understood by taking the example of an item. The first item students gradually.
in the schedule is “Listen to each other.” If all the students in a
group listen to each other all the time during a session without
arguing irrelevantly (they can have constructive discussion),
6. Results
the group was given the rating “always” for that session. This The result of the experiment shows a remarkable increase
gave the raw data for statistical calculations. in the social and cooperative skills of the students over the
period of ten days. The findings with respect to the 1st, 4th,
5. Implementation and Experimental Period 7th, and 10th days are given in the following points.

The developed instructional material with all the modifica- (1) Findings with regard to the cooperative skills of the
tions was employed in the classroom by making group of students on the first day, that is, before the implemen-
five students. The roles which are usually described in any tation of the cooperative learning based instructional
other strategy were omitted here as the jigsaw strategy has material, depicted the mean score to be 2.89 and stan-
all the students acting as the expert of the subtopic provided dard deviation (S.D.) as 2.93. This descriptive statistics
to them. Every topic was divided into five subtopics which gave the idea of the skills in students by default and
makes 5 experts in each group. They were provided with the homogeneity of the group. The mean and S.D. of the
background of the topic and asked to discuss the topic within fourth day were 3.32 and 3.31, respectively. It was the
their group. They discussed the topic, shared the views, and score after the implementation of the instructional
came up with enhanced knowledge. material. The mean scores of the first and fourth days
The cooperative skills of the students were observed were compared by employing Mann Whitney U test
in formal classroom setting four times during the ten-day and this resulted in significant difference between the
period with the gap of two days between two consequent cooperative skills of the students observed on day 1
observations. The skills were observable as the fourteen items and day 4 at 0.05 level of significance, indicating that
had the skills of listening, initiating the discussion, leading, the scores are improved.
and participating. All these skills were directly observable and
were marked in the observation schedule. The observation (2) The mean and S.D. of the seventh day were 3.65 and
of the first day was compared with that of the fourth day to 3.66 and the difference between day 1 and day 7 was
see if there was any difference during that period. The Mann found to be significant at 0.01 level of significance.
Education Research International 5

Table 3: Difference between the scores of the first and the subse- The students developed the feeling of working in a group in
quent observations. science classroom and it also improved their performance as
Statistical technique the discussion leads to considerable clarity of concepts.
Days Summation of ranks
The cooperative learning approach to teaching increases
Sample size 𝑈obt ∗ not only the understanding of students but also the social
(∑ 𝑅)
and cooperative skills they exhibit. The study states that
Day 1 40 149 44∗ cooperative learning approach increases the social and coop-
Day 4 40 257 erative skills of the students. Baghcheghi et al. [23] con-
Day 1 40 122 cluded that cooperative learning is an effective method for
17∗∗
Day 7 40 284 improved and increased communication skills of nursing
Day 1 40 109 students especially in interactive skills and Wang [24], in his
4∗∗ research, concluded that students got a lot of experiences;
Day 10 40 297
students were more motivated to work hard which created
Note. ∗ 𝑝 < 0.05, ∗∗ 𝑝 < 0.01.
a positive atmosphere. Siegel [25] concluded that because of
its potential to increase student achievement and social skills
(3) The mean and S.D. of the tenth day were 4.79 and development, cooperative learning has been advocated for
4.71, respectively, and the difference between them school reform. To the existing facts, the present research adds
was found to be significant at 0.01 level of significance. an important finding that the social skills of the students also
The lesser the value of U, the more significant the can be increased by cooperative learning method, which is
difference between the two values; and in Table 3, the revolutionary as many students lack social skills in the class
values are given which shows the maximum differ- and when they go out in job, it becomes their weakness.
ence between day 1 and day 10 showing a very signif-
icant improvement in cooperative and social skills of 8. Conclusion
students during the period of ten days.
The cooperative learning theory which plays an important
7. Discussions role in the field of education recently aroused the interest of
the experts in the field of science teaching in terms of design-
The experimental phase can be marked as increasing inter- ing a curriculum which enables the students to learn through
group and intragroup dialogue and interaction among stu- cooperative effort, problem solving, and decision making.
dents. From a constructivist perspective of learning, dialogue In a cooperative classroom, the teacher assumes the role of
and argument are valuable learning opportunities [21, 22]; facilitator and guide. Teacher becomes the manager and not
from this point of view, experiment was successful. Fur- the controller of the class. Students take the responsibility
thermore, with reference to first objective, the researcher of their own learning. They ask questions, state problems,
developed the lesson plans in science including the topics design activities, and discuss their results with others. Stu-
of biology, physics, and chemistry and the lesson plans were dents are more positive about each other when they learn
implemented in the classroom which was problematic in the cooperatively than when they learn alone, competitively, or
beginning as the students were much of passive listeners in individualistically—regardless of differences in ability, ethnic
the lecture method and took a day to adjust to this new background, or being handicapped or not. This promotes the
method. Some students were shy to speak up on the first day success of all the students. Learning is most effective when
but spoke from the 3rd and 4th days. the learner is active and the process of learning is interesting
Objective two required the information about the social for him/her. While there are limitations on when and where
and cooperative skills of the students on the first day and last you may use competitive and individualistic learning, you
day to see whether or not the skills are improving gradually, may structure any learning task in any subject area with any
which was fulfilled by the positive results of the experiment. curriculum by cooperative learning approach. The present
Students were enthusiastic regarding the cooperative learning study added one more reason to use cooperative learning
method of teaching. In the beginning, students were hesitant method in the already existing numerous known and proved
to speak up in front of the whole class which decreased reasons.
with time and they became confident. Not all the students
are willing to participate in the group; some like to listen 9. Implication in Classroom
and put forward their view point only when asked. It states
that the students developed their cooperative skills by using In pursuing a means to develop academic excellence in stu-
cooperative learning method in teaching and by letting the dents of various levels in schools, cooperative learning has
students decide when to learn and when to stop and when to been proved to be effective [26]. In addition, cooperative
move further. The 1st hypothesis of the study was rejected in learning, as mentioned earlier, is an excellent tool to develop
the light of the results obtained by applying the statistics and new understanding about various concepts. If the relation-
analyzing the data of first-second and first-third observations ship found in the present study stands true in further investi-
as given in Table 3. In the same way, hypothesis 2 was gation, our understanding of cooperative learning and devel-
also rejected. Social skills and the group processing were opment of social skills of students can be improved further.
improved by teaching with cooperative learning method. For example, we will not label the students as good or bad
6 Education Research International

or as low achiever or high achiever because they would be (ii) Criterion for Success ——
part of the team and not just an entity struggling to get the
result alone. This insight would help the instructors improve (i) Positive Interdependence ——
the effectiveness of the instruction because they know that it
is not just the classroom learning, but in fact the skill devel- (ii) Individual Accountability ——
opment of students. Similar interventions will require further
investigation in future projects once this relationship is fully (iii) Expected Behaviour ——
validated and explored.
Monitoring. Teacher would monitor and organize the whole
10. Limitations and Suggestions for class; intergroup and intragroup interactions would be orga-
nized in an effective way. It would be seen whether the groups
Future Research
are working as a team or they are just putting forward their
As with all experimental studies, this study also has some views without listening to others. Teacher would resolve the
limitations that will need to be addressed in future studies. In conflict (if any) within a group or between two groups.
addition to increasing the sample size to confirm the result of
this study, we also need to address the observation technique Behaviour Observed. The behavior of the students would be
used in this study, which is by a single person. Further studies observed by observation schedule, a tool made by teacher.
can be done by having objective observation involving 3 or
4 observers and the results would be even more valid that Assessment of Learning:
way. We also need to determine whether we can observe
the skills in any other cooperative learning setting. The field
(i) Small Group Processing ——
of cooperative learning research can be explored more by
carrying out research in other subjects like history, civics, (ii) Goal Setting ——
English, mathematics, environmental science, social science,
(iii) Whole Class Processing ——
economics, and so forth. Cooperative learning method can
be applied to study and compare its effect on the students
of different culture. Further, the research can be carried out Task steps and procedures (Structuring the task)
to study the effect of cooperative learning approach on the
Positive Interdependence: ——
students of higher grade as well, as the students of higher
grade are expected to be intellectually developed. This may Individual Accountability: Individual and Group
be a question to be answered whether those students who assessment
have difficulty in learning and following the lecture given by
the professors can benefit from this approach of teaching and End by: ——
an important study can be conducted on the achievement of Note
slow learners and the impact of cooperative learning based
instructional material on their learning habit and psycholog- Small Group Processing. The interaction and discussions
ical traits. among the members of the same group.

Appendix Whole Class Processing. The interaction among the experts of

every group on the same subtopic.
Final Draft of Lesson Plan for Teaching
Based on Cooperative Learning Method Positive Interdependence and Individual Accountability. Ele-
(Format by Johnson et al. [15]) ments of cooperative learning in the group.

School: —— Jigsaw Technique of Cooperative Learning. Groups with five

Period: —— Duration: —— students are set up. Each group member is assigned some
Subject Area: —— Date: —— unique material to learn and then to teach his group
Lesson: —— Class: —— members. To help in the learning students across the class
Numbers of Students: —— Number of Groups: —— working on the same subsection get together to decide what
Objectives: —— is important and how to teach it [21]. After practice in these
(i) Academic: —— “expert” groups the original groups reform and students teach
each other. Tests or assessment follows.
(ii) Social Skills: ——

Cooperative Strategy: Jigsaw Conflict of Interests

Area of Expertise: ——
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests
(i) Academic Task —— regarding the publication of this paper.
Education Research International 7

References [18] R. M. Gillies, “The behaviors, interactions, and perceptions of

junior high school students during small-group learning,” Jour-
[1] American Association for the Advancement of Science, Science nal of Educational Psychology, vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 137–147, 2003.
for All Americans: Project 2061, Oxford University Press, 1989. [19] R. M. Gillies, “The effects of communication training on
[2] D. W. Johnson and R. Johnson, “Positive interdependence: key teachers'and students'verbal behaviours during cooperative
to effective cooperation,” in Interaction in Cooperative Groups: learning,” International Journal of Educational Research, vol. 41,
The Theoretical Anatomy of Group Learning, R. Hertz-Lazarow- no. 3, pp. 257–279, 2004.
itz and N. Miller, Eds., Cambridge University Press, New York, [20] N. M. Webb, M. L. Franke, T. De et al., “Explain to your partner:
NY, USA, 1992. teachers’ instructional practices and students’ dialogue in small
[3] T. Panitz, “Collaborative versus cooperative learning: a com- groups,” Cambridge Journal of Education, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 49–
parison of the two concepts which will help us understand the 70, 2009.
underlying nature of interactive learning,” Cooperative Learning [21] J. Biggs and C. Tang, Teaching for Quality Learning at University:
and College Teaching, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 5–7, 1997. What the Student Does, The Society for Research into Higher
[4] E. Zakaria and Z. Iksan, “Promoting cooperative learning in Education, Open University Press, Maidenhead, UK, 4th edi-
science and mathematics education: a Malaysian perspective,” tion, 2011.
Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Educa- [22] A. Pritchard and J. Woollard, Psychology for the Classroom:
tion, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 35–39, 2007. Constructivism and Social Learning, Routledge, New York, NY,
[5] K. J. Hermann, “The impact of cooperative learning on student USA, 2010.
engagement: results from an intervention,” Active Learning in [23] N. Baghcheghi, H. R. Koohestani, and K. Rezaei, “A comparison
Higher Education, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 175–187, 2013. of the cooperative learning and traditional learning methods
in theory classes on nursing students'communication skill with
[6] D. Vreven and S. McFadden, “An empirical assessment of coop-
patients at clinical settings,” Nurse Education Today, vol. 31, no.
erative groups in large, time-compressed, introductory courses,”
8, pp. 877–882, 2011.
Innovative Higher Education, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 85–92, 2007.
[24] P. Wang, “Applying Slavin’s cooperative learning technique to
[7] M. Cavanagh, “Students’ experiences of active engagement EFL conversation class,” The Journal of Human Resource and
through cooperative learning activities in lectures,” Active Adult Learning, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 112–120, 2009.
Learning in Higher Education, vol. 12, pp. 23–33, 2011.
[25] C. Siegel, “Implementing a research-based model of cooperative
[8] N. Webb and A. Mastergeorge, “Promoting effective helping learning,” Journal of Educational Research, vol. 98, no. 6, pp.
behavior in peer-directed groups,” International Journal of 339–349, 2005.
Educational Research, vol. 39, no. 1-2, pp. 73–97, 2003. [26] R. Stevens and R. Slavin, “The Cooperative elementary school:
[9] R. Wegerif, N. Mercer, and L. Dawes, “From social interaction effects on Students achievement, attitudes and social relation,”
to individual reasoning: An empirical investigation of a possible The American Educational Research Journal, vol. 32, pp. 321–351,
sociocultural model of cognitive development,” Learning and 1995.
Instruction, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 493–516, 1999.
[10] C. Toumasis, “Cooperative study teams in mathematics class-
rooms,” International Journal of Mathematical Education in
Science and Technology, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 669–679, 2004.
[11] R. M. Felder, “Cooperative learning in the sequence of engineer-
ing courses: a success story,” Cooperative Learning and College
Teaching Newsletter, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 10–13, 1995.
[12] S. Lighfner, M. J. Bober, and C. Willi, “Team-based activities to
promote engaged learning,” College Teaching, vol. 55, no. 1, pp.
5–18, 2007.
[13] S. V. Rosser, “Group work in science, engineering, and math-
ematics: consequences of ignoring gender and race,” College
Teaching, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 82–88, 1998.
[14] P. J. Hinds, K. M. Carley, D. Krackhardt, and D. Wholey,
“Choosing work group members: balancing similarity, com-
petence, and familiarity,” Organization Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, vol. 81, no. 2, pp. 226–251, 2000.
[15] D. W. Johnson, R. Johnson, and E. Holubec, Cooperation in the
Classroom, Interaction Book Company, Edina, Minn, USA, 8th
edition, 2008.
[16] D. W. Johnson and R. T. Johnson, “An educational psychology
success story: social interdependence theory and cooperative
learning,” Educational Researcher, vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 365–379,
2009.
[17] D. W. Johnson and R. Johnson, “Controversy and peace educa-
tion,” Journal of Research in Education, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 71–91,
2003.
  Child Development 
Research

Autism
Research and Treatment
Economics
Research International
Journal of
Biomedical Education
Nursing
Research and Practice
Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

Journal of
Criminology

Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

Archaeology
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

Submit your manuscripts at

http://www.hindawi.com

International Journal of Education

Population Research Research International
Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

Depression Research Journal of Journal of Schizophrenia

Sleep Disorders
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
and Treatment
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
Anthropology
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
Addiction
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
Research and Treatment
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

Geography Psychiatry
Journal Journal
Current Gerontology
& Geriatrics Research

Journal of Urban Studies

Hindawi Publishing Corporation
Aging Research
Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation
Research
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
Hindawi Publishing Corporation Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014
http://www.hindawi.com